Jump to content











Photo
- - - - -

PicoXP x64?


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Xiaopang

Xiaopang

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  •  
    Iran

Posted 15 February 2010 - 09:30 AM

Hi there,

I'm looking for a command line only XP with very little RAM-load and x64 support that allows me to run command line tools. I couldn't see any projects in that regard. Right now I'm trying to turn PicoXP into an x64 version, but this is a lot of work which I would like to prevent doing if a similar project already existed. Any leads would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance. :cheers:

#2 was_JFX

was_JFX

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 483 posts
  •  
    Germany

Posted 15 February 2010 - 04:17 PM

LiveXP does more or less support XP 64 Bit SP2 as source for builds.

Try disabling most script, may you come close to what you want.

:cheers:

#3 Xiaopang

Xiaopang

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  •  
    Iran

Posted 15 February 2010 - 04:35 PM

Thanks for the hint :cheers:

I'm almost finished modding PicoXP, but ran into an error. May be LiveXP can help me overcome it :cheers:

#4 Xiaopang

Xiaopang

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  •  
    Iran

Posted 16 February 2010 - 08:55 PM

Just came back to say that LiveXP didn't work out at all. The build process is an error-riddled catastrophe. After like a dozen failed tries with 5 different Windows versions I resorted back to Microsofts own deploy kit and made my own x64 PE with it. Took like 2 minutes. Each failed LiveXP build took like 15 minutes on my system, so that's quite a difference.

Anyway, I have it slimmed down by now. It's just as small as PicoXP right now and I'm not even finished with the reduction process.

#5 Lancelot

Lancelot

    Frequent Member

  • .script developer
  • 5013 posts
  • Location:Turkiye/Izmir
  • Interests:*Mechanical stuff and Physics,
    *LiveXP, BartPE, SherpyaXPE,
    *Basketball and Looong Walking,
    *Buying outwear for my girlf (Reason: Girls are stupid about buying bad stuff to make themselves uglier :))
    *Girls (Lyric: Girl,...., You will be a womann, Soon)
    *Answering questions for "Meaning of life",
    *Helping people,

    Kung with LiveXP, Fu with Peter :)
  •  
    Turkey

Posted 16 February 2010 - 09:54 PM

Hi n a n a g a

maybe you failed because you are unexperienced with winbuilder

I just made a build with LiveXP recommended by using 2k3-sp2-x64-enu source, build went fine with a more or less working LiveXP x64
Posted Image

Result can be reduced to smallest as possible with using winbuilder. (which you could already start by unselecting all apps scripts before build)


Well since you find your way with billy, good luck. :cheers:

:cheers:

#6 Xiaopang

Xiaopang

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  •  
    Iran

Posted 16 February 2010 - 10:17 PM

Hi Lancelot,

I'm definitely inexperienced when it comes to Winbuilder. It was my second time using it after successfully creating a PicoXP image. Still, I don't think that was the reason why nothing worked. After all it's just a program and not rocket science. Here's what happened:

With every image I used, the script complained about not finding CONTROL.CA_ in an ASMS subfolder that didn't exist in any of my editions. I did have an ASMS*.CAB, but its internal structure looked nothing like what LiveXP expected. BDD actually made proper use of the file, extracted it and everything went fine. I later found the files in the appropriate folder on the WinPE-disc, but not in the form that LiveXP's script expected. It looks pretty clear to me that my Windows versions were not supported even though they were unaltered originals. Whichever version the script expected, it didn't give any hints as to which ones would work. Also, I found it pretty annoying that the build process was canceled every time a file wasn't found. I would have expected to be asked to give a path to the file or at the very least give me the option to ignore the error and to go on with the process. As of now I can say that those files weren't needed at all, at least not for my purposes. Anyway, I'm just glad that I'm done with the task and that everything was easier than I had expected.

#7 Lancelot

Lancelot

    Frequent Member

  • .script developer
  • 5013 posts
  • Location:Turkiye/Izmir
  • Interests:*Mechanical stuff and Physics,
    *LiveXP, BartPE, SherpyaXPE,
    *Basketball and Looong Walking,
    *Buying outwear for my girlf (Reason: Girls are stupid about buying bad stuff to make themselves uglier :))
    *Girls (Lyric: Girl,...., You will be a womann, Soon)
    *Answering questions for "Meaning of life",
    *Helping people,

    Kung with LiveXP, Fu with Peter :)
  •  
    Turkey

Posted 16 February 2010 - 10:32 PM

Hi n a n a g a,

With every image I used, the script complained about not finding CONTROL.CA_ in an ASMS subfolder that didn't exist in any of my editions.

it exists in all editions I have. But forget it, I recently changed the rule to check I386\Setupldr.bin believeing it will exists at all :rofl:. (update your livexp with winbuilder) :cheers:

I did have an ASMS*.CAB, but its internal structure looked nothing like what LiveXP expected. BDD actually made proper use of the file, extracted it and everything went fine. I later found the files in the appropriate folder on the WinPE-disc, but not in the form that LiveXP's script expected. It looks pretty clear to me that my Windows versions were not supported even though they were unaltered originals.

we make adjustments with unaltered known sources which we check many with architecture and language. These maybe happening due to your source problem !!?? (no problem here using unmodified 2k3/XP-SP2-x64-enu sources)

Whichever version the script expected, it didn't give any hints as to which ones would work.

Project designed to work with XPsp2, xpsp3, 2k3sp1, 2k3sp2 and more or less 2k3-XP-sp2-enu-x64

Also, I found it pretty annoying that the build process was canceled every time a file wasn't found. I would have expected to be asked to give a path to the file or at the very least give me the option to ignore the error and to go on with the process.

It is there to protect end user because of unknown/modified sources end users have. You can ignore stop by changing options of winbuilder (winbuilder-->tools-->options-->stop build error) but than you are responsible for the result.
The scripts that need additional files already have options for end user to give path.

As of now I can say that those files weren't needed at all, at least not for my purposes. Anyway, I'm just glad that I'm done with the task and that everything was easier than I had expected.

The way you get your goal is a good way :rofl: I just want to inform that your failures are not about LiveXP project but smells an improper source issue. :cheers:

edit: minor fixes

#8 Xiaopang

Xiaopang

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  •  
    Iran

Posted 16 February 2010 - 11:11 PM

Hi n a n a g a,
it exists in all editions I have. But forget it, I recently changed the rule to check I386\Setupldr.bin believeing it will exists at all :rofl:. (update your livexp with winbuilder) :rofl:


I might give it a shot once I'm done with my own build :cheers:


we make adjustments with unaltered known sources which we check many with architecture and language. These maybe happening due to your source problem !!?? (no problem here using unmodified 2k3/XP-SP2-x64-enu sources)

Project designed to work with XPsp2, xpsp3, 2k3sp1, 2k3sp2 and more or less 2k3-XP-sp2-enu-x64


Here are the names of two images it didn't work with: ARMPXVOL_EN, X13_41611 (both XP Pro SP2 x64)


It is there to protect end user because of unknown/modified sources end users have. You can ignore stop by changing options of winbuilder (winbuilder-->tools-->options-->stop build error) but than you are responsible for the result.


I totally overlooked that option. Good that it was included though, that would have helped lol. Either way, I found Winbuilder's gui less than optimal. Usually I check out a program's options first, but the many script-options overshadowed any thought that other options might exist. Also the term "tools" usually has a different denotation than "options" plus the placement of the buttons themselves and their distracting icons make this pretty unintuitive.


The scripts that need additional files already have options for end user to give path.


Good thing. If it would also ask for a path when expected files are missing it would be perfect.


The way you get your goal is a good way :rofl: I just want to inform that your failures are not about LiveXP project but smells an improper source issue. :cheers:


Indeed, but my source couldn't have been improper. It was a download from the Microsoft website itself. Also, BDD did handle the asms.cab correctly. If the image was faulty it should have complained about the same missing files.

#9 pscEx

pscEx

    Platinum Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 12707 posts
  • Location:Korschenbroich, Germany
  • Interests:What somebody else cannot do.
  •  
    European Union

Posted 17 February 2010 - 12:05 AM

I followed this thread interested and wanted to see how you can get your wanted result with established projects.

Currently it looks for me that you did not.

I'm the author of picoXP in very old WinBuilder times (maybe about version 048 or similar. At that time the name has been OpenBuilder rather that WinBuilder): http://www.boot-land...?...post&p=2628.

(To explain: I'm currently also the main developer of WinBuilder.) During development, it did not seem to make sence to reanimate this ICE-age project.

But I tried to let the idea survive (with some more bytes on the final ISO ...).

Try this:
Download nativeEx_core, nativeEx_barebone and nativeEx_Tools from then nativeEx server (...BSOD is not necessary, to download just needs some more time)
Define your x64 source CD
Goto Basic > !WBManager > WBManager
Choose 'Pico' in the lower 'Restore' panel, and click 'Restore'
Do not worry about an 'Access violation' window popping up. That is a theme I'm currently fighting with.

IMPORTANT: Uncheck Basic > Build > 'Install dll files'. If you do not, it would bring 32 bit files into your 64 bit PE, and the result is unpredictable.

Build the project.

If it runs into emulator and works there: Congratulations! Then we can discuss the extentions you need (BTW some fonts are missing ...), or how to add apps ...
If it does not: We (mainly me) have a problem. Then please report here, and let me put some questions.

I just tried everything like I explained. A cmd window came up in the emulator.

Good luck!

Peter :cheers:

#10 Lancelot

Lancelot

    Frequent Member

  • .script developer
  • 5013 posts
  • Location:Turkiye/Izmir
  • Interests:*Mechanical stuff and Physics,
    *LiveXP, BartPE, SherpyaXPE,
    *Basketball and Looong Walking,
    *Buying outwear for my girlf (Reason: Girls are stupid about buying bad stuff to make themselves uglier :))
    *Girls (Lyric: Girl,...., You will be a womann, Soon)
    *Answering questions for "Meaning of life",
    *Helping people,

    Kung with LiveXP, Fu with Peter :)
  •  
    Turkey

Posted 17 February 2010 - 12:21 AM

Here are the names of two images it didn't work with: ARMPXVOL_EN, X13_41611 (both XP Pro SP2 x64)

ARMPXVOL_EN is XPSP0x64enu , if you slipstream with sp2 package it is a valid source for LiveXP. :cheers:
X13-41611 - a source I've never used (or know untill today), as far as i know X13-06218 is the source we use 2k3sp2x64enu. There is only a chinese catalog on microsoft for X13-41611 and I still could not figure out what it is !!

I guess now it is more clear that we have a source mismatch trouble and I guess you now understand it is a nice idea to have "stop if fail" feature default. Normally user comes boot-land to ask what went wrong and it would be easier to figure out this if you came around earlier which we would like to help you to gain valuable time.



Also the term "tools" usually has a different denotation than "options" plus the placement of the buttons themselves and their distracting icons make this pretty unintuitive.

Please make a request for winbuilder. psc is also senior developer of winbuilder.

Good thing. If it would also ask for a path when expected files are missing it would be perfect.

I am not sure if it is a good or bad idea. Further decisions are up to winbuilder development, please make a request.

Since there is no objection from psc at current topic, Here is request section to make your requests for winbuilder.
http://www.boot-land...;showproject=12

#11 Xiaopang

Xiaopang

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  •  
    Iran

Posted 17 February 2010 - 01:20 AM

I followed this thread interested and wanted to see how you can get your wanted result with established projects.

Currently it looks for me that you did not.


Yeah, I hoped to do it that way, but it just didn't work out. Quite frankly said, the information on the projects was insufficient for my taste. For example, I missed explicit compatibility information, for example whether or not x64 was supported, which operating system etc. That could have helped a great deal tracking down compatible projects.


I'm the author of picoXP in very old WinBuilder times (maybe about version 048 or similar. At that time the name has been OpenBuilder rather that WinBuilder): http://www.boot-land...?...post&p=2628.

(To explain: I'm currently also the main developer of WinBuilder.) During development, it did not seem to make sence to reanimate this ICE-age project.


I know. I visited your homepage and also tracked your other projects. Your name also flashed by when I tried LiveXP. At least on some scripts. Good job on PicoXP! Actually, I was amazed seeing that you didn't make an x64 version. Before trying PicoXP I gave other, much smaller XP-versions a try (NCLI and multiple derivatives), but those were little more than proof-of-concept bootable recovery consoles and therefore of little use. They lacked the ability to run external command line tools and that's what's great about PicoXP.


But I tried to let the idea survive (with some more bytes on the final ISO ...).


In what way?


Try this:
Download nativeEx_core, nativeEx_barebone and nativeEx_Tools from then nativeEx server (...BSOD is not necessary, to download just needs some more time)
Define your x64 source CD
Goto Basic > !WBManager > WBManager
Choose 'Pico' in the lower 'Restore' panel, and click 'Restore'
Do not worry about an 'Access violation' window popping up. That is a theme I'm currently fighting with.

IMPORTANT: Uncheck Basic > Build > 'Install dll files'. If you do not, it would bring 32 bit files into your 64 bit PE, and the result is unpredictable.


Thanks for the hint! I already tried nativeEx and its variants when LiveXP didn't work out for me, but it also produced errors which I can't remember.I didn't see that PIcoXP-option though. I'll give it another look tomorrow. I wouldn't mind getting another minimal build out of nativeEx and LiveXP so that I could compare RAM-usage with my minimal build. By the way, thanks for compiling Ramstatus x64:) It works nicely in my PE. I'm just not sure about its accuracy.



Build the project.

If it runs into emulator and works there: Congratulations! Then we can discuss the extentions you need (BTW some fonts are missing ...), or how to add apps ...
If it does not: We (mainly me) have a problem. Then please report here, and let me put some questions.

I just tried everything like I explained. A cmd window came up in the emulator.

Good luck!


Thanks, I'll let you know how it worked out tomorrow :cheers:

Greetings aus Leipzig


ARMPXVOL_EN is XPSP0x64enu , if you slipstream with sp2 package it is a valid source for LiveXP. :rofl:


Actually, I just checked it out. I already had SP2 slipstreamed with nlite into it. I saw LiveXp complaining about nlite. I think this was one of the images that the LiveXP-script refused to process due to nlite's finger prints (one of many problems I faced, but didn't mention before). I tried to remove nlite's traces to force LiveXP through the process, but gave up on it eventually.


X13-41611 - a source I've never used (or know untill today), as far as i know X13-06218 is the source we use 2k3sp2x64enu. There is only a chinese catalog on microsoft for X13-41611 and I still could not figure out what it is !!


I don't have it installed right now, or else I could tell you exactly what the difference to standard XP Pro SP2 x64 is (WIN51AP.SP2). I can send you a directory and file listing tomorrow. May be that helps tracking down the incompatibility problems.


I guess now it is more clear that we have a source mismatch trouble and I guess you now understand it is a nice idea to have "stop if fail" feature default. Normally user comes boot-land to ask what went wrong and it would be easier to figure out this if you came around earlier which we would like to help you to gain valuable time.


Since I ran into so many problems earlier, I just blamed the script and thought it would need quite a bit of work to get this done. I had also time constraints, so my time to play around was limited. Actually, from my perspective, I think it's nicer if the program finishes despite errors. All I basically needed was a compatible x64 registry hive and may be txtsetup.sif. The rest I would have done manually by using PicoXP as a basis.
Even if I had chosen LiveXP as a source, I would have most likely being able to fix the few missing entries. After all, a damaged source to work with is better than nothing at all and if you know the errors beforehand, then fixing them is half as bad :rofl:


Since there is no objection from psc at current topic, Here is request section to make your requests for winbuilder.
http://www.boot-land...;showproject=12


Thanks, I'll check it out tomorrow. For today, thanks for all your comments and explanations :cheers:

#12 Lancelot

Lancelot

    Frequent Member

  • .script developer
  • 5013 posts
  • Location:Turkiye/Izmir
  • Interests:*Mechanical stuff and Physics,
    *LiveXP, BartPE, SherpyaXPE,
    *Basketball and Looong Walking,
    *Buying outwear for my girlf (Reason: Girls are stupid about buying bad stuff to make themselves uglier :))
    *Girls (Lyric: Girl,...., You will be a womann, Soon)
    *Answering questions for "Meaning of life",
    *Helping people,

    Kung with LiveXP, Fu with Peter :)
  •  
    Turkey

Posted 17 February 2010 - 01:34 AM

Actually, I just checked it out. I already had SP2 slipstreamed with nlite into it. I saw LiveXp complaining about nlite.

You can not imagine how many fake reports posted before and resulted with loosing a lot of valuable time when enduser create topics for errors which ended with nlite usage.

Message should give you the idea that it cause troubles, why forcing .....
so you get warning message saying nlited source must not be used, than why not slipstream yourself with method billy already provided.

Billy says, only using -s switch with the service package pointing target is enough
example:
WindowsXP-KBxxxxx-SP2-ENU.exe -s:c:\xpsp2

check google for some tutorials.

#13 Xiaopang

Xiaopang

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  •  
    Iran

Posted 17 February 2010 - 08:15 AM

You can not imagine how many fake reports posted before and resulted with loosing a lot of valuable time when enduser create topics for errors which ended with nlite usage.


Yeah, that makes sense.


Message should give you the idea that it cause troubles, why forcing .....
so you get warning message saying nlited source must not be used, than why not slipstream yourself with method billy already provided.

Billy says, only using -s switch with the service package pointing target is enough
example:
WindowsXP-KBxxxxx-SP2-ENU.exe -s:c:\xpsp2

check google for some tutorials.


Thanks for the hint. I never did it that way since I didn't know how that Microsoft publicly offered a way to do it :smiling9: I'm not much of a friend of slipstreaming content in general. I rather install vanilla versions instead.


Edit: Couldn't try the above stuff as planned. I'll be away for the next 10 days, so it'll take a while till I can finally get around to it.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users